Author: Slater Wold
Date: 12:23:45 08/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2001 at 14:47:15, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >On August 07, 2001 at 12:20:38, Slater Wold wrote: > > >>I am not naive. You are just paranoid. Control of the market is one thing, >>taking over the world is another. > >I was not talking about "taking over the world". No cheap shots please. >Dominating the market, that was it about. Microsoft wants control,like any >company wants control. It's the reason why sometimes mergers are prohibited and >blocked by governements, because the monopoly of a company in a certain field is >bad for the market. That was my story about the consumer based windows, and the >way I was forced to buy it. Sorry. Wasn't taking a cheap shot. > >>The judge hated MS. Everyone knows that. His Compaq probably crashed that >>morning. Granted, the dealings were bad. Ok. But that trial was a goof. We >>all know that. > > >I don't. Besides, you can't imply that a court decision should not be considered >valid because the judge wasn't on our side. Why should a convicted man listen to >a court decision? After all, the judge hated him, so no need to think his >judgement is valid. The appeals judge said he made remarks about MS that were, "inappropriate" and felt his judgement was impaired by his personal opionon. > >>Yes, and I don't make a lot of money, and am stuck with an underperforming car. > >Were you *forced* to buy the second choice car with the house you bought or >rented? It's all relative. You sacrfice. You want the best, you BUY the best. Whatever MS chooses to charge for their OS is their option. $100 for Windows 98 vs $300 for Win 2k Pro. It's their choice. It's my choice. And their are plenty of people offering Win 2k as an OS. Perhaps not at best buy, but around. > >> >>>when you were forced to pay for the OS coming with your PC as well; >> >>Go buy a clone. They are cheaper anyway. Load whatever you'd like. > > >So basically I should throw away money I didn't want to spend in the first place >for a product that didn't function properly (enough), and buy a replacement out >of my own pocket again? Should *I* be the one to pay for the underperformance of >another? > > >>Protecting their assets. We all pay for others mistakes. I am 22, and have >>never have had an at fault accident. But I pay HIGH premiums, because I am >>"more likely" to get in an accident. I am paying for other mistakes and >>irresposiblity. Oh well. Fact of life. I too am forced to buy insurance. And >>while I HATE to do it, I do it. And wish others would too. > >Insurance is about liability regarding other vulnerable people, software on my >PC is not. But let's not pick over bad comparisons. Your point is clear. We are >not disagreeing over the fact that they have the right to. It's not the >contents, but the paper wrapped around it. > > >>Then don't buy them. If enough people agree with you, they will stop. > >I should forfeit on buying a PC of my choice because the OS choice isn't free? >Conditional sale is bad, and nor for one reason very often prohibited. > > >> >>Please give me at least 1 example of "disabling" the alternatives. Other than >>Netscape. > >XP and Java. Interesting. Did not know about this. >>My father will _NEVER_ consider the customer. The customer doesn't pay him, MS >>does. > >If you are right, it's worse than I thought. I don't know if I am right or wrong. But perhaps you misunderstood me. My father puts 110% into his work. He does what he thinks PEOPLE (customer or supervisor) might like. In return, MS either denies or approves his thoughts, and goes with it or crushes it. Therefore, he has PEOPLE in mind while working. So he considers the customer, but they are not really his problem. They are MS problem. He simply does what he thinks people will like, and MS does the rest. >Obviously you should ask your father again. He will disagree, no doubt. Every >slice of bread he eats, is paid by his customers. His *only* focus will have to >be the customer. >However sometimes the good intentions at microscale will work out bad on >macroscale. The company does some things wrong. Not all. He never talks to customers, or has any interactions with them. When he does, most have no idea that he was part of the MS OS. I understand what you're saying, I just don't think you understand me. > >>People hate MS. People hate >>Bill Gates. Oh well. A lot of people hate a lot of people. It's fine. I >>understand. > >Maybe inadvertedly you implicitly suggest people criticising Microsoft are >MS-bashers or -haters per sé. I hope so, as this is a very bad discussion trick, >sorry. Don't take offense. Not at all. Not one bit. I am _NOT_ MS's #1 fan. >I don't hate Microsoft at all. I don't hate Bill Gates.I think it's stupid to >hate a company or a person if it does things not well enough. We are talking >performance and quality, not personal resentment. Agreed. >Microsoft does certain things not well enough, and the way they are dealing with >that problem suggests they think it's no problem at all. > >I *know* it's a problem, as I experience it over and over again. > >Windows 98 randomly crashing my computer -even unattended- doesn't make me hate >Bill Gates. >But I want Microsoft to know I'm a part of their daily slice of bread. And with >a proper OS at a reasonable price with enough performance and good stability >they have me as a bread provider for the future. >A paid customer. They deserve it for good work. As long as they deliver the >quality I need, and not force me to pay for the quality I have gotten now. I understand 100%. >It's not Microsoft that determines the quality. > >I do, as a customer. As it should be. Yes. And we are all in troble, when it's the other way around. > > >J. I see where you're at J. Trust me I do. I am not trying to fight, just wanted to respond to a random act of MS hating. I just think look at the whole thing, and go, "as the world turns." Shrug it off. You don't. That's fine. Like I said before, we're different. And that's fine with me. :) Slate
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.